On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 2:05 PM, David Woodhouse <dw...@infradead.org> wrote: > But isn't that the *point*? We have a framework with plugins for all > manner of different protocols, instead of a mess of separate protocol- > specific clients each of which can handle only *one*.
When the choice is given to me between sticking to an abstraction that tries but doesn’t manage to grasp the quirks of several protocols, or switching to a protocol specific API and embrace it to make sure it is correctly and fully supported, I pick the latter. Even if I have to do it twice or more. I don’t think the *point* should be to support several protocols badly. I also don’t think we should aim at supporting all the protocols that exist. I don’t think a single client can map to the features of all of them. If someone cares enough to implement support for a protocol in Telepathy, they could probably implement support for the protocol elsewhere too. -- Alexandre Franke GNOME Hacker & Foundation Director _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
